Civil War: Social, Economic And Social Division In The United States

As the United States began to come together as a nation, the plantation South and industrial North had little in common economically, making political compromise difficult. When Abraham Lincoln was elected president, the Confederate South quickly formed their own government focused on states’ rights. Lincoln believed allowing the plantation South to secede would tear apart the nation but divisions within the country would not allow a quick solution to the political conflicts. In addition, social injustice between the rich and poor as well as racial tensions worsened as both sides waged war. Overall, the Civil War reflected the deep political, economic, and social divisions within America that continue to persist today. Leading up to

The economic advantages of the North were much greater with a population of over 22 million of which 1.3 million worked in factories, verses a Southern population of 9 million with only 110,000 working in factories (p. 585). The North also had the railroad system to move soldiers and goods (p. 585) as well as an established treasury from which to obtain loans and collect taxes, “while the Confederacy had few resources to draw from” (p. 608). Both governments printed treasury notes to offset the financial burdens of war, but only the North made them legal tender which meant they were essentially useless in the South (p. 608-609). The South was built as a plantation economy relying on slave labor and was not positioned well to fund or supply troops for a large-scale war over several years as opposed to the North, whose industrial economy benefited from the war. The Confederate’s unbacked treasury notes also caused a 9000% inflation rate, resulting in great suffering for many in the South who were also faced with the collapse of the plantation economy (p. 614). Unable to provide for their families, many Southern women whose husbands were off fighting in the war did not think there was any other option but to riot to be heard (p. 613-618). Economically, the final outcome of the South was directly tied to whether slave labor remained on Southern

Locks et al. explained how Southerners viewed the plantation life of slave and master in a paternalistic way, claimed it was supported by their religious beliefs, and made it the foundation of their economy – which was in strong contrast to the industrial North. As a result, their main reason for going to war with the North was to defend what they viewed as states’ rights (p. 605). There were also socioeconomic factors influencing who was forced to fight, however. Locks et al. reported that the wealthy were able to pay a fee to avoid military conscription in both the North and South causing draft riots for Northerners who could not afford to pay (p. 622). For most it was seen as “a rich man’s war but a poor man’s fight” (p. 614). Racism was another social problem common throughout the country and due to the failing economies on both sides, scarce resources caused even more racial tension. It was not a moral judgment against slavery that pushed Republicans into a civil war with Confederates, instead emancipation was used as a political strategy to undermine the Southern economy. As a consequence, when politicians in the North announced their plan to implement emancipation it caused widespread panic for Northerners who feared losing their jobs to freeman while they were away at war. These social conflicts caused many